Skip to content

WIP: recovery checks pass on corrected head; main integration still required - #155

Merged
LIghtJUNction merged 8 commits into
mainfrom
integrate/issue-recovery-cloud-20260928
Sep 29, 2026
Merged

LIghtJUNction merged 8 commits into
mainfrom
integrate/issue-recovery-cloud-20260928

Conversation

@LIghtJUNction

@LIghtJUNction LIghtJUNction commented Sep 28, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Current state — do not merge before current-main integration

Corrected head 0e4dbe7, tree 5a81a4d35a973115f3f62ecf6e4ed8cc00768ac6. The earlier nonexistent-verifier import and the subsequent literal-newline syntax error are fixed on this head. Those historical failures do not describe the current source.

Issue recovery run36480031762 is successful. Artifact 10995627663 was independently downloaded, SHA-256 verified as e200808e372cc7eeab5e688fa29948fbd0c269261727837879294969c1f838d6, and inspected: 55 passed / 0 failures / 0 errors / 0 skipped. Its source.json binds the exact head/tree above, run attempt1 and Python3.15.0rc2. These are isolated PostgreSQL regressions, not production evidence.

Full Rewrite run36480031758 also reports success on this corrected push head. This checkpoint does not invent independently audited shard counts or substitute the old branch for a new merged tree. The PR still reports a main conflict; synchronize and review the exact combination, then rerun the full final-head gates before merging.

Preserved work and RED history

The independent branch integrate/issue-recovery-cloud-20260928 preserves #145 f2ebc093fb8333c2a0f196b6ebd86cfdf717affa and #154 3490750dd8fd59c8070e9816a104292db0937cea histories. Their original branches were not changed.

Regression-first commit 4bfeece690a26970b66f86b06cd3817dbb0b38cd, tree 9f2b8db3861e8e299c6522d21a18d03d3d4b5dcd, produced 15 failed / 40 passed / 0 skipped / 0 errors in real PostgreSQL run36471956362. The original36 cases passed; new19 covered current Root certificate/credential validity, issuer/parent/self-signature, year9999 overflow and stale topic-ban expiry. Previously recorded artifact10992276490 SHA-256: 01d114f54d75777640e49df670f7a0dbb0c7f9404c726768065daeee201fe9d4.

The verifier/date-subtraction/topic-ban changes preserve the assertions. .github/workflows/issue-recovery.yml adds focused provenance-bound evidence; it does not replace complete four-shard exact-node-ID, conformance/tokenizer, build or applicable recovery gates. Prior tool-write denials and failed heads remain in discussion/history; this update only records subsequently observed code and actual CI results, not a bypass or a production authorization.

Integration and remaining acceptance

Main476e64f squash-merged #154; #165 then merged as 08c5892, tree 8a62150d8273a2c75775872694749cb529835966. Refresh main again before integration. Do not lose either source history or newer tool/executor/client/metadata regressions, or force-push another work stream.

The backup-retirement functions still require the installed msgd command entry and local file-boundary acceptance. Rolling notes: docs/ISSUE_PROGRESS.md; coordination #83. This metadata correction does not modify this PR's branch or close its remaining work.

Refs #68 #69 #70 #82 #83 #85. No umbrella issue is complete. #64/#65/#84 still need authorized live evidence. No deployment, real Root/PIN, real funds/outbound delivery, backup destruction or restore promotion was performed.

LIghtJUNction and others added 6 commits September 28, 2026 23:02
A restored database can omit a ban that the pinned log still requires. Record that ban locally, keep lift deny-only, and state why promotion stays blocked.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
The one_root index allows only one parentless resource, so a second root topic made the topic_ban.apply fixture fail with constraint_conflict on PostgreSQL.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
The published 0.x line is a different series. This source version does not claim a PyPI release or a finished production migration.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…ement records

backup_retired now needs one exact root-signed record bound to the subject and
both old key IDs, imported behind require_local_console and re-verified on every
read; server_key_retired additionally needs online retirement. Missing, altered,
expired, misbound or pre-rotation records fail closed. Slice of #68.

Co-authored-by: Cursor <cursoragent@cursor.com>
…in cloud CI

Preserve both #145 and #154 histories on the current main tree. Add real
PostgreSQL regressions before fixes and exact checkout/tree evidence.
Refs #68 #69 #70 #83 #85. No production operations or issue closure.
…piry

Fix the 15 failures reproduced by cloud run 36471956362 without changing
any regression assertions. Keep current-authority reads mutation-free and
recovery quarantined. Use time differences to avoid datetime overflow.
Refs #68 #69 #70 #83 #85.
Copilot AI lite review requested due to automatic review settings September 28, 2026 19:31

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has reached their quota limit.

@chatgpt-codex-connector

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented Sep 28, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review Summary

This comment shows the latest Codex review activity on this pull request.

Review Status Commit Review trigger
🔒 Security Review ✅ Completed 2026-09-28T19:40:05.219054Z 1ca13fd PR opened
ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review" or "@codex security review".

Codex reacts with 👀 while any review is running, comments if it has suggestions, and reacts with 👍 once all reviews finish with no findings.

@LIghtJUNction LIghtJUNction changed the title fix: integrate recovery PRs, verify current Root authority and cloud regressions WIP: recovery integration — cloud regressions reproduced, import fix blocked Sep 28, 2026
@LIghtJUNction LIghtJUNction changed the title WIP: recovery integration — cloud regressions reproduced, import fix blocked WIP: recovery integration — verifier fix submitted, cloud CI running Sep 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Submitted verifier correction on head 0e4dbe777053e354bcf4845b851a0c9b86ab8310 (fix: correct root certificate verification call syntax). The prior f317920... run exposed a literal \\n syntax error; that is fixed in this head. Cloud runs for this exact head are active: recovery 36480031762, full CI 36480031758. Keep WIP until both complete and main divergence is handled.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

独立回读:0e4dbe777053e354bcf4845b851a0c9b86ab8310 的完整 Rewrite CI36480031758现已四分片、conformance、build、精确node-ID gate全部success;恢复专项36480031762也success。我未修改此分支。请在与当前main冲突处理后的组合head重新验收,不把旧head绿灯当作新组合绿灯。本会话继续独立#156/#157架构修复。

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants